X-Message-Number: 21994
From:
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2003 16:00:26 EDT
Subject: Re: CryoNet #21973 - #21982
In a message dated 6/15/03 2:00:56 AM, writes:
<< Simon and Lomberg weren't trained in petroleum geology >>
Well now, Mark Plus, so is it that no one unless so trained can look at data
and speak with any authority on such matters? What nonsense. Does Deffeyes
speak for everyone in petroleum geology? And, for that matter, is the
"Association for the Study of Peak
Oil" a disinterested party? Just from the name, I doubt it. Even the oil
companies have a vested interest in high oil prices and hyping future shortages
along with drilling everywhere for more. The manifest fact is that the pre-tax
inflation-adjusted price of oil has been dropping steadily for nearly 80
years as known reserves as well as production and consumption have been
increasing. Long predicted, no peak is even yet on the horizon unless you count
the
infinitely riggable "models." As for the supposed "fossil" origins of petroleum,
I am just a casual lay reader on the subject, but from what I have read, the
hypothesis is far from proven, partly because there seems to be so much oil in
so many places around the globe that it casts in doubt the notion that it
could all be geologically trapped animal residue. The case for coal as a resdue
of decayed plants is obvious, of course. We can argue ourselves blue on the
subject of oil and other so-called "non-renewable" resources, but it should be
obvious to cryonicists that if the doomsdayers are right, we are out of luck,
because in the future world of scarcity and enveloping oceans that they
imagine, nobody will allow funds to go into the energy-wasteful topping off of
liquid
nitrogen containers, let alone developing and sustaining an infrastructure to
usher in the revival of anyone frozen now or in the future.
Kevin Spoering, Message #21976 From: "Spoering" <>
Subject: In Defense Of Mark Plus, clearly has also been convinced of the same
limits hypothesis in citing with admiration THE GREAT BUST AHEAD by Daniel
Arnold,
and THE RETIREMENT MYTH by Craig Karpel. The market for this doomsday stuff
is endless and the believers are in the millions. Notice that the "bust" is
always ahead. Don't bother explaining why the world standard of living has
risen substantially over the last century as the population has exploded, while
the quality of life in the developed world has advanced out of all comprehension
and in flat contradiction of doomsday models. A standard response of our
critics is that even to imagine cryonics is an obscene luxury while other
millions around the globe are starving and dying, etc. and indeed it is! They
are
right, it is a luxury along with a full refrigerator, air conditioned houses, a
car, a second car, a jet plane ride, lap tops, cable, internet access. Where
do we start, dear friends? What goes first?
I respect the fact that many on this list, perhaps Mark Plus, included, are
confirmed environmentalists. Indeed, on many issues, I count myself in this
number, but if you think our world is headed for disaster unless we drastically
limit consumption of practically every consumable item, then your views are
in direct contradiction of cryonics and you probably don't belong on this
list. I stand by my previous comments and strongly suggests those concerned
with
these issues to at least browse the contrarian references I cited.
Ron Havelock
President-elect, Washington Area Life Extension Society
CI Member
Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=21994